A recent post pointed out how often in years past young girls were pressured to "go away" and put their babies up for adoption. The pressure came from family, from school -- from every conceivable venue. During those years it was the thing to do.

The ongoing horsewhipping of the Church, however, has become a bore. Had she been impregnated by a public school history teacher, for example, I doubt she would have garnered this much attention.

For the past several years the Church has been taking steps to make amends to those who have been harmed by a handful of "bad eggs." Unfortunately, in the process of righting these wrongs, many good and holy priests and countless parishioners have had to pay the price. Parishes are closing, and monies that would otherwise be spent on worthwhile causes are going in to the deep pockets of lawyers. As a Catholic, I find this equally disturbing.

For a priest to have violated this young woman this way is inexcusible, and he should be made to account for his behavior. But this story has the distinct odor of someone looking to make a buck, who is simply jumping on the abuse bandwagon.

She couldn't get the baby baptized unless she put it up for adoption? Please. Her parish wasn't the only church in town.

Now, it may be that this woman has already designated a crisis pregnancy center or other advocacy support group to be the beneficiary of whatever money she receives in settlement, and that she really does just want an apology and sense of closure. If that is the case, I apologize and support her quest.

If not, frankly Scarlet...

Thanks for listening.

Heidi Saxton

I can see why you feel the way you do, but I don't agree with this part of your statement:

"She couldn't get the baby baptized unless she put it up for adoption? Please. Her parish wasn't the only church in town."

So you think that if she had just gone to another church in the diocese everything would have been a-ok?

I'm not sure that would have been the case. From the reading I have done, the Church didn't support unwed mothers. Period. The pressure was always to surrender.

I agree with you that it would be preferable to sue for an apology and a donation to a parenting support group.

In point of fact, the services of a priest are not needed for baptism (I studied this in sacraments class at seminary). All that is needed is water and the proper formula ("I baptize you in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.")

Very few people at that time were "supportive" of unwed mothers, and in many cases with good reason.
Particularly in cases of rape (which this may well have been), the association with the birth father could very likely have had permanent, serious, and negative affects on the child. Through adoption, the child got a clean slate and a set of loving parents.

In my own family, two of my sisters had children out of wedlock. In both cases, the child would have been infinitely better off had he/she been placed for adoption. Both were terribly abused by the men my sisters subsequently brought into their lives.

I realize not all single mothers subject their children to this kind of treatment -- and yet, it is also a mistake to take the position that the future of a child is always brighter if he is raised by his birthmother.

(I'm surprised I'd have to point these things out on an adoption website, but there you have it.)

The problem is not with a "few bad eggs" The problem was the massive cover up by Bishops and others in authority.

Some of the bad eggs were priests, others were bishops. But ALL Catholics have had to pay for it.

This does seem to be rather off-point for the adoption forum, however. Like I said, I find the whole subject tiresome. Much rather talk about my two darling adopted children! :-)

I too am thrilled that there is a law suit addressing some of the injustices inflicted on a birth mom in the past. It is long overdue. I know many birth moms in that era who were subjected to unbelievably cruel and sadistic treatment. Sad to say that the Catholic maternity homes were guilty of some of the worst behavior.

The fact that plenty of people and institutions did not support young pregnant women doesn't excuse or make it right. To say that they were good reasons not to.....I can't even civily respond to that statement.

The behavior of the Church towards pregnant unmarried women and their cruelties to them for decades is very much on point.

I so hope a precedent is set in the courts regarding coercion. As you said, it is a huge issue that did not end in the 60's, unfortunately.